LETTER: Russian cyber attacks extend to energy disinformation

Is there any question that few things in America are more important than being free from foreign political interference? That’s why Russia’s brazen effort to use social media to influence the 2016 presidential election — and interfere with our nation’s energy production — is so ominous.

The extent to which the Kremlin used social media to achieve its ends was driven home to me by a report on Russian meddling from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which was released by Sen. Ben Cardin, a Democrat from Maryland. The report described how Russian operatives hacked the U.S. energy grid and nuclear power companies, manipulated naive environmental groups, used social media to exacerbate differences over climate change, and attempted to deceive the American public, especially through inflammatory posts on social media as related to hydraulic fracturing and the construction of pipelines for oil and natural gas.

Congress needs to rein in Facebook and other platforms for social media. Apologists who maintain that tighter regulation of social media would abridge civil liberties need to get a grip. If nothing else, the danger to our nation’s democratic institutions has made one thing clear: they need protection from outside interference. A good start would be to mandate that social media companies make public the sources of funding for political advertisements.

Russia has a significant interest in disrupting U.S. oil and gas production. Here’s why:

American oil and gas production is booming. Our nation’s emergence as a global energy exporter —particularly in liquefied natural gas (LNG) — presents a significant threat to Russian energy interests. By exporting LNG to countries like Ukraine, Lithuania, and Poland, the U.S. reduces the influence and revenue generated by Russian energy exports. And it affects the Kremlin’s ability to carry out its geopolitical agenda in Europe.

Hence, Russian agents deceptively used social media to whip up environmental opposition to oil and gas production, zeroing in on the “keep-it-in-the-ground” movement.

To help turn public opinion against U.S. energy policies, Russian operatives portrayed energy companies in a negative way and encouraged protests of fracking, pipeline construction and offshore drilling. One post, for example, highlighted U.S. energy companies’ profits and the energy-related subsidies they receive and contrasted that with an apparent lack of subsidies for public school funding.

Cyber attacks against U.S. energy facilities represent a special challenge. U.S. government officials say that Russian agents hacked nuclear power companies. No harm was done to U.S. nuclear plants, because they are equipped to withstand cyber attacks. Nuclear plants are among the most secure elements of the energy infrastructure. But the United States must remain vigilant and have the tools to withstand possible cyber attacks against other types of energy facilities including refineries, LNG terminals, and the electric grid.

Saying that the Kremlin has refined and used such weapons over time, Senator Cardin warned: “If the United States fails to work with urgency to address this complex and growing threat, the regime in Moscow will become further emboldened. It will continue to develop and refine its arsenal to use on democracies around the world, including against U.S. elections in 2018 and 2020.”

One thing is clear: the United States must approach Russia resolutely and decisively. The Trump team has been somewhat ambivalent here, sometimes imposing economic sanctions and sometimes threatening without action. Also, concessions to blackmail and threats, even if they serve as temporary expedients, will exacerbate these problems.

The United States must take the initiative to develop a strategy against cyber attacks and be resolute in executing countermeasures so that its opponents are so worried about what America is planning that they dare not plan cyber attacks or disinformation campaigns.